Talk:Dettlaff van der Eretein/@comment-91.67.95.240-20160727084255/@comment-27722422-20190319210757
@ Don’t you think it’s too simplified ‘alive=good, dead=bad’? Death is death life is life (ya, like in the song), no good or bad, sometimes someone wants to live sometimes vice versa, sometimes someone wants somebody to live and sometimes wishes him death, ain’t it the topic of the holy war ‘which is worse assisted suicide or life of pain and misery’. I believe the reasoning behind him not killing without a reason and never having had previously about the correctness of language construction, sorry I have autism English’s not my native; hence feel free to ask if you haven’t understood anything I poorly formulated is different. Haven’t you asked yourself why he kills hundreds with a blink of an eye and mutilates himself ‘cause of one man murder? Him not killing should make him look trying actually to behave well, to do things right, but they are backed not by the understanding of mankind’s lives value, self-control or anything but by his lack of experience and information and unwillingness to deal with humans at all: ‘I don’t kill them ‘cause I don’t have any business with them, but only until some of their shit somehow touches me’. And the death of the only man he met close to be his friend caused Detlaff so much emotional pain that he preferred to chop his own hand only to stifle that kind of pain with physical - he understands d.l.C is worth living only because they were friends. He is very limited, very subjective, egocentric - childish, I agree, because of lack of social experience he is just like a child. It is very well illustrated in the story with the Brute of Lyria, when he killed the beast only when it somehow affected him personally, before he possessing the might superior to a fiend was ignorant to the deaths of 2 hundred men and unwilling to do anything, he just doesn’t know Spider-man catchphrase about responsibility. You for some reason don’t recall massacre in Dun Tynne where Detlaff with Regis (honorable humanist by the way and not considered bloody monster for it) cut down dozens of men (sellswords, probably nasty, but not guilty in crime Detlaff, in particular, killed them for) - for some reason you justify his their actions, you find a reason why he did what he did. And IMHO for Detlaff lives of those men and lives of Bouclair citizens are equally useless and invaluable, he just doesn’t understand what makes them valuable, they are neither his pack, nor friends, nor love interest, brethren, etc., while the reason driving him he values and understands very well. Yes, like you fairly noticed those mentally ill are treated, not killed, ‘cause they again too have no culpability and cannot realize blameworthiness of their deeds and actions. And still Detlaff is the different case, he is not a psychopath who kills because he is fond of murder or despises his victims for race or sex or other motives. What does any criminal law say about children? There is an age of responsibility, before reaching it a person is not held liable or responsible for the actions as being presumed not reached enough measure of understanding of the terms of a society. Detlaff, as we both think, is childish and I give into the idea that analogously he being in law terms not rational and reasonable - not human, should be spared of human especially superficial judgment ‘he kills a lot —> he is bad and guilty —> death’ without analyzing what made him to act the way he did.